(03-18-2021, 09:16 AM)Mikey Wrote:

(03-17-2021, 08:42 PM)TheDuke007 Wrote: When I first heard O'Shaughnessy was re-signed, I was a little mixed.  Obviously, he upgrades the roster, but I was concerned that this might be it at tight end.  I like O'Shaugnessy for depth, but not as the primary starter.  Although you can keep four tight ends, teams usually keep three and that would be O'Shaugnessy, Manhertz and Oliver.  By trading Oliver, it says to me that they are still looking in free agency or the draft for someone better.

However, in regards to Oliver, I don't like it.  I think you should give players time to develop.  What if the injuries were just some bad luck?  He was a high third round pick and it's only been two years.  Maybe he never succeeds, but the cost of giving him one more year to try was incredibly low.

...what if keeping him on the roster prevents you from finding the next Kittle or Gates? Works both ways.

Think of it this way - we get our comp pick for letting him test FA a year early, and likely get more than a comp pick would bring us had he held on to him.

I don't get this.  People are convinced that Cam Robinson can improve after four seasons and 50 starts, but there's a 0% chance that a player who has been limited to 4 games in two seasons because of injury can't?  That makes no sense!

The roster spot argument is ridiculous.  We're not under 53 roster limit right now.  Besides, injuries are the biggest concern with Oliver.  If he's injured again, players on injured reserve don't count as a roster spot.  You then have to remember that the pick we're getting is conditional.  That means if he doesn't make the Ravens, we get absolutely nothing.  In simplistic terms, there's two scenarios here:

Oliver is Bad:  In this case, we get NOTHING.
Oliver is Good:  We gave up an early 3rd rounder at a position of desperate need for a very late 7th rounder.

This is a classic case of heads we tie, tails we lose.  If you think that's a good bet, Las Vegas casinos would love you.

---